On March 10, 2023, the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center ceased its collecting and reporting of global COVID-19 data. For updated cases, deaths, and vaccine data please visit: World Health Organization (WHO)For more information, visit the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center.COVID-19 Trends MethodologyOur goal is to analyze and present daily updates in the form of recent trends within countries, states, or counties during the COVID-19 global pandemic. The data we are analyzing is taken directly from the Johns Hopkins University Coronavirus COVID-19 Global Cases Dashboard, though we expect to be one day behind the dashboard’s live feeds to allow for quality assurance of the data.DOI: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.125529863/7/2022 - Adjusted the rate of active cases calculation in the U.S. to reflect the rates of serious and severe cases due nearly completely dominant Omicron variant.6/24/2020 - Expanded Case Rates discussion to include fix on 6/23 for calculating active cases.6/22/2020 - Added Executive Summary and Subsequent Outbreaks sectionsRevisions on 6/10/2020 based on updated CDC reporting. This affects the estimate of active cases by revising the average duration of cases with hospital stays downward from 30 days to 25 days. The result shifted 76 U.S. counties out of Epidemic to Spreading trend and no change for national level trends.Methodology update on 6/2/2020: This sets the length of the tail of new cases to 6 to a maximum of 14 days, rather than 21 days as determined by the last 1/3 of cases. This was done to align trends and criteria for them with U.S. CDC guidance. The impact is areas transition into Controlled trend sooner for not bearing the burden of new case 15-21 days earlier.Correction on 6/1/2020Discussion of our assertion of an abundance of caution in assigning trends in rural counties added 5/7/2020. Revisions added on 4/30/2020 are highlighted.Revisions added on 4/23/2020 are highlighted.Executive SummaryCOVID-19 Trends is a methodology for characterizing the current trend for places during the COVID-19 global pandemic. Each day we assign one of five trends: Emergent, Spreading, Epidemic, Controlled, or End Stage to geographic areas to geographic areas based on the number of new cases, the number of active cases, the total population, and an algorithm (described below) that contextualize the most recent fourteen days with the overall COVID-19 case history. Currently we analyze the countries of the world and the U.S. Counties. The purpose is to give policymakers, citizens, and analysts a fact-based data driven sense for the direction each place is currently going. When a place has the initial cases, they are assigned Emergent, and if that place controls the rate of new cases, they can move directly to Controlled, and even to End Stage in a short time. However, if the reporting or measures to curtail spread are not adequate and significant numbers of new cases continue, they are assigned to Spreading, and in cases where the spread is clearly uncontrolled, Epidemic trend.We analyze the data reported by Johns Hopkins University to produce the trends, and we report the rates of cases, spikes of new cases, the number of days since the last reported case, and number of deaths. We also make adjustments to the assignments based on population so rural areas are not assigned trends based solely on case rates, which can be quite high relative to local populations.Two key factors are not consistently known or available and should be taken into consideration with the assigned trend. First is the amount of resources, e.g., hospital beds, physicians, etc.that are currently available in each area. Second is the number of recoveries, which are often not tested or reported. On the latter, we provide a probable number of active cases based on CDC guidance for the typical duration of mild to severe cases.Reasons for undertaking this work in March of 2020:The popular online maps and dashboards show counts of confirmed cases, deaths, and recoveries by country or administrative sub-region. Comparing the counts of one country to another can only provide a basis for comparison during the initial stages of the outbreak when counts were low and the number of local outbreaks in each country was low. By late March 2020, countries with small populations were being left out of the mainstream news because it was not easy to recognize they had high per capita rates of cases (Switzerland, Luxembourg, Iceland, etc.). Additionally, comparing countries that have had confirmed COVID-19 cases for high numbers of days to countries where the outbreak occurred recently is also a poor basis for comparison.The graphs of confirmed cases and daily increases in cases were fit into a standard size rectangle, though the Y-axis for one country had a maximum value of 50, and for another country 100,000, which potentially misled people interpreting the slope of the curve. Such misleading circumstances affected comparing large population countries to small population counties or countries with low numbers of cases to China which had a large count of cases in the early part of the outbreak. These challenges for interpreting and comparing these graphs represent work each reader must do based on their experience and ability. Thus, we felt it would be a service to attempt to automate the thought process experts would use when visually analyzing these graphs, particularly the most recent tail of the graph, and provide readers with an a resulting synthesis to characterize the state of the pandemic in that country, state, or county.The lack of reliable data for confirmed recoveries and therefore active cases. Merely subtracting deaths from total cases to arrive at this figure progressively loses accuracy after two weeks. The reason is 81% of cases recover after experiencing mild symptoms in 10 to 14 days. Severe cases are 14% and last 15-30 days (based on average days with symptoms of 11 when admitted to hospital plus 12 days median stay, and plus of one week to include a full range of severely affected people who recover). Critical cases are 5% and last 31-56 days. Sources:U.S. CDC. April 3, 2020 Interim Clinical Guidance for Management of Patients with Confirmed Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19). Accessed online. Initial older guidance was also obtained online. Additionally, many people who recover may not be tested, and many who are, may not be tracked due to privacy laws. Thus, the formula used to compute an estimate of active cases is: Active Cases = 100% of new cases in past 14 days + 19% from past 15-25 days + 5% from past 26-49 days - total deaths. On 3/17/2022, the U.S. calculation was adjusted to: Active Cases = 100% of new cases in past 14 days + 6% from past 15-25 days + 3% from past 26-49 days - total deaths. Sources: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e4.htm https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#variant-proportions If a new variant arrives and appears to cause higher rates of serious cases, we will roll back this adjustment. We’ve never been inside a pandemic with the ability to learn of new cases as they are confirmed anywhere in the world. After reviewing epidemiological and pandemic scientific literature, three needs arose. We need to specify which portions of the pandemic lifecycle this map cover. The World Health Organization (WHO) specifies six phases. The source data for this map begins just after the beginning of Phase 5: human to human spread and encompasses Phase 6: pandemic phase. Phase six is only characterized in terms of pre- and post-peak. However, these two phases are after-the-fact analyses and cannot ascertained during the event. Instead, we describe (below) a series of five trends for Phase 6 of the COVID-19 pandemic.Choosing terms to describe the five trends was informed by the scientific literature, particularly the use of epidemic, which signifies uncontrolled spread. The five trends are: Emergent, Spreading, Epidemic, Controlled, and End Stage. Not every locale will experience all five, but all will experience at least three: emergent, controlled, and end stage.This layer presents the current trends for the COVID-19 pandemic by country (or appropriate level). There are five trends:Emergent: Early stages of outbreak. Spreading: Early stages and depending on an administrative area’s capacity, this may represent a manageable rate of spread. Epidemic: Uncontrolled spread. Controlled: Very low levels of new casesEnd Stage: No New cases These trends can be applied at several levels of administration: Local: Ex., City, District or County – a.k.a. Admin level 2State: Ex., State or Province – a.k.a. Admin level 1National: Country – a.k.a. Admin level 0Recommend that at least 100,000 persons be represented by a unit; granted this may not be possible, and then the case rate per 100,000 will become more important.Key Concepts and Basis for Methodology: 10 Total Cases minimum threshold: Empirically, there must be enough cases to constitute an outbreak. Ideally, this would be 5.0 per 100,000, but not every area has a population of 100,000 or more. Ten, or fewer, cases are also relatively less difficult to track and trace to sources. 21 Days of Cases minimum threshold: Empirically based on COVID-19 and would need to be adjusted for any other event. 21 days is also the minimum threshold for analyzing the “tail” of the new cases curve, providing seven cases as the basis for a likely trend (note that 21 days in the tail is preferred). This is the minimum needed to encompass the onset and duration of a normal case (5-7 days plus 10-14 days). Specifically, a median of 5.1 days incubation time, and 11.2 days for 97.5% of cases to incubate. This is also driven by pressure to understand trends and could easily be adjusted to 28 days. Source

Based on a comparison of coronavirus deaths in 210 countries relative to their population, Peru had the most losses to COVID-19 up until July 13, 2022. As of the same date, the virus had infected over 557.8 million people worldwide, and the number of deaths had totaled more than 6.3 million. Note, however, that COVID-19 test rates can vary per country. Additionally, big differences show up between countries when combining the number of deaths against confirmed COVID-19 cases. The source seemingly does not differentiate between "the Wuhan strain" (2019-nCOV) of COVID-19, "the Kent mutation" (B.1.1.7) that appeared in the UK in late 2020, the 2021 Delta variant (B.1.617.2) from India or the Omicron variant (B.1.1.529) from South Africa.

The difficulties of death figures

This table aims to provide a complete picture on the topic, but it very much relies on data that has become more difficult to compare. As the coronavirus pandemic developed across the world, countries already used different methods to count fatalities, and they sometimes changed them during the course of the pandemic. On April 16, for example, the Chinese city of Wuhan added a 50 percent increase in their death figures to account for community deaths. These deaths occurred outside of hospitals and went unaccounted for so far. The state of New York did something similar two days before, revising their figures with 3,700 new deaths as they started to include “assumed” coronavirus victims. The United Kingdom started counting deaths in care homes and private households on April 29, adjusting their number with about 5,000 new deaths (which were corrected lowered again by the same amount on August 18). This makes an already difficult comparison even more difficult. Belgium, for example, counts suspected coronavirus deaths in their figures, whereas other countries have not done that (yet). This means two things. First, it could have a big impact on both current as well as future figures. On April 16 already, UK health experts stated that if their numbers were corrected for community deaths like in Wuhan, the UK number would change from 205 to “above 300”. This is exactly what happened two weeks later. Second, it is difficult to pinpoint exactly which countries already have “revised” numbers (like Belgium, Wuhan or New York) and which ones do not. One work-around could be to look at (freely accessible) timelines that track the reported daily increase of deaths in certain countries. Several of these are available on our platform, such as for Belgium, Italy and Sweden. A sudden large increase might be an indicator that the domestic sources changed their methodology.

Where are these numbers coming from?

The numbers shown here were collected by Johns Hopkins University, a source that manually checks the data with domestic health authorities. For the majority of countries, this is from national authorities. In some cases, like China, the United States, Canada or Australia, city reports or other various state authorities were consulted. In this statistic, these separately reported numbers were put together. For more information or other freely accessible content, please visit our dedicated Facts and Figures page.

Data for CDC’s COVID Data Tracker site on Rates of COVID-19 Cases and Deaths by Vaccination Status. Click 'More' for important dataset description and footnotes

Dataset and data visualization details: These data were posted on October 21, 2022, archived on November 18, 2022, and revised on February 22, 2023. These data reflect cases among persons with a positive specimen collection date through September 24, 2022, and deaths among persons with a positive specimen collection date through September 3, 2022.

Vaccination status: A person vaccinated with a primary series had SARS-CoV-2 RNA or antigen detected on a respiratory specimen collected ≥14 days after verifiably completing the primary series of an FDA-authorized or approved COVID-19 vaccine. An unvaccinated person had SARS-CoV-2 RNA or antigen detected on a respiratory specimen and has not been verified to have received COVID-19 vaccine. Excluded were partially vaccinated people who received at least one FDA-authorized vaccine dose but did not complete a primary series ≥14 days before collection of a specimen where SARS-CoV-2 RNA or antigen was detected. Additional or booster dose: A person vaccinated with a primary series and an additional or booster dose had SARS-CoV-2 RNA or antigen detected on a respiratory specimen collected ≥14 days after receipt of an additional or booster dose of any COVID-19 vaccine on or after August 13, 2021. For people ages 18 years and older, data are graphed starting the week including September 24, 2021, when a COVID-19 booster dose was first recommended by CDC for adults 65+ years old and people in certain populations and high risk occupational and institutional settings. For people ages 12-17 years, data are graphed starting the week of December 26, 2021, 2 weeks after the first recommendation for a booster dose for adolescents ages 16-17 years. For people ages 5-11 years, data are included starting the week of June 5, 2022, 2 weeks after the first recommendation for a booster dose for children aged 5-11 years. For people ages 50 years and older, data on second booster doses are graphed starting the week including March 29, 2022, when the recommendation was made for second boosters. Vertical lines represent dates when changes occurred in U.S. policy for COVID-19 vaccination (details provided above). Reporting is by primary series vaccine type rather than additional or booster dose vaccine type. The booster dose vaccine type may be different than the primary series vaccine type. ** Because data on the immune status of cases and associated deaths are unavailable, an additional dose in an immunocompromised person cannot be distinguished from a booster dose. This is a relevant consideration because vaccines can be less effective in this group. Deaths: A COVID-19–associated death occurred in a person with a documented COVID-19 diagnosis who died; health department staff reviewed to make a determination using vital records, public health investigation, or other data sources. Rates of COVID-19 deaths by vaccination status are reported based on when the patient was tested for COVID-19, not the date they died. Deaths usually occur up to 30 days after COVID-19 diagnosis. Participating jurisdictions: Currently, these 31 health departments that regularly link their case surveillance to immunization information system data are included in these incidence rate estimates: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, New York City (New York), North Carolina, Philadelphia (Pennsylvania), Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Washington, and West Virginia; 30 jurisdictions also report deaths among vaccinated and unvaccinated people. These jurisdictions represent 72% of the total U.S. population and all ten of the Health and Human Services Regions. Data on cases among people who received additional or booster doses were reported from 31 jurisdictions; 30 jurisdictions also reported data on deaths among people who received one or more additional or booster dose; 28 jurisdictions reported cases among people who received two or more additional or booster doses; and 26 jurisdictions reported deaths among people who received two or more additional or booster doses. This list will be updated as more jurisdictions participate. Incidence rate estimates: Weekly age-specific incidence rates by vaccination status were calculated as the number of cases or deaths divided by the number of people vaccinated with a primary series, overall or with/without a booster dose (cumulative) or unvaccinated (obtained by subtracting the cumulative number of people vaccinated with a primary series and partially vaccinated people from the 2019 U.S. intercensal population estimates) and multiplied by 100,000. Overall incidence rates were age-standardized using the 2000 U.S. Census standard population. To estimate population counts for ages 6 months through 1 year, half of the single-year population counts for ages 0 through 1 year were used. All rates are plotted by positive specimen collection date to reflect when incident infections occurred. For the primary series analysis, age-standardized rates include ages 12 years and older from April 4, 2021 through December 4, 2021, ages 5 years and older from December 5, 2021 through July 30, 2022 and ages 6 months and older from July 31, 2022 onwards. For the booster dose analysis, age-standardized rates include ages 18 years and older from September 19, 2021 through December 25, 2021, ages 12 years and older from December 26, 2021, and ages 5 years and older from June 5, 2022 onwards. Small numbers could contribute to less precision when calculating death rates among some groups. Continuity correction: A continuity correction has been applied to the denominators by capping the percent population coverage at 95%. To do this, we assumed that at least 5% of each age group would always be unvaccinated in each jurisdiction. Adding this correction ensures that there is always a reasonable denominator for the unvaccinated population that would prevent incidence and death rates from growing unrealistically large due to potential overestimates of vaccination coverage. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs): IRRs for the past one month were calculated by dividing the average weekly incidence rates among unvaccinated people by that among people vaccinated with a primary series either overall or with a booster dose. Publications: Scobie HM, Johnson AG, Suthar AB, et al. Monitoring Incidence of COVID-19 Cases, Hospitalizations, and Deaths, by Vaccination Status — 13 U.S. Jurisdictions, April 4–July 17, 2021. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2021;70:1284–1290. Johnson AG, Amin AB, Ali AR, et al. COVID-19 Incidence and Death Rates Among Unvaccinated and Fully Vaccinated Adults with and Without Booster Doses During Periods of Delta and Omicron Variant Emergence — 25 U.S. Jurisdictions, April 4–December 25, 2021. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2022;71:132–138. Johnson AG, Linde L, Ali AR, et al. COVID-19 Incidence and Mortality Among Unvaccinated and Vaccinated Persons Aged ≥12 Years by Receipt of Bivalent Booster Doses and Time Since Vaccination — 24 U.S. Jurisdictions, October 3, 2021–December 24, 2022. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2023;72:145–152. Johnson AG, Linde L, Payne AB, et al. Notes from the Field: Comparison of COVID-19 Mortality Rates Among Adults Aged ≥65 Years Who Were Unvaccinated and Those Who Received a Bivalent Booster Dose Within the Preceding 6 Months — 20 U.S. Jurisdictions, September 18, 2022–April 1, 2023. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2023;72:667–669.

Please cite the following paper when using this dataset:

N. Thakur, “A Large-Scale Dataset of Twitter Chatter about Online Learning during the Current COVID-19 Omicron Wave,” Journal of Data, vol. 7, no. 8, p. 109, Aug. 2022, doi: 10.3390/data7080109

Abstract

The COVID-19 Omicron variant, reported to be the most immune evasive variant of COVID-19, is resulting in a surge of COVID-19 cases globally. This has caused schools, colleges, and universities in different parts of the world to transition to online learning. As a result, social media platforms such as Twitter are seeing an increase in conversations, centered around information seeking and sharing, related to online learning. Mining such conversations, such as Tweets, to develop a dataset can serve as a data resource for interdisciplinary research related to the analysis of interest, views, opinions, perspectives, attitudes, and feedback towards online learning during the current surge of COVID-19 cases caused by the Omicron variant. Therefore this work presents a large-scale public Twitter dataset of conversations about online learning since the first detected case of the COVID-19 Omicron variant in November 2021. The dataset is compliant with the privacy policy, developer agreement, and guidelines for content redistribution of Twitter and the FAIR principles (Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reusability) principles for scientific data management.

Data Description

The dataset comprises a total of 52,984 Tweet IDs (that correspond to the same number of Tweets) about online learning that were posted on Twitter from 9th November 2021 to 13th July 2022. The earliest date was selected as 9th November 2021, as the Omicron variant was detected for the first time in a sample that was collected on this date. 13th July 2022 was the most recent date as per the time of data collection and publication of this dataset.

The dataset consists of 9 .txt files. An overview of these dataset files along with the number of Tweet IDs and the date range of the associated tweets is as follows. Table 1 shows the list of all the synonyms or terms that were used for the dataset development.

• Filename: TweetIDs_November_2021.txt (No. of Tweet IDs: 1283, Date Range of the associated Tweet IDs: November 1, 2021 to November 30, 2021)
• Filename: TweetIDs_December_2021.txt (No. of Tweet IDs: 10545, Date Range of the associated Tweet IDs: December 1, 2021 to December 31, 2021)
• Filename: TweetIDs_January_2022.txt (No. of Tweet IDs: 23078, Date Range of the associated Tweet IDs: January 1, 2022 to January 31, 2022)
• Filename: TweetIDs_February_2022.txt (No. of Tweet IDs: 4751, Date Range of the associated Tweet IDs: February 1, 2022 to February 28, 2022)
• Filename: TweetIDs_March_2022.txt (No. of Tweet IDs: 3434, Date Range of the associated Tweet IDs: March 1, 2022 to March 31, 2022)
• Filename: TweetIDs_April_2022.txt (No. of Tweet IDs: 3355, Date Range of the associated Tweet IDs: April 1, 2022 to April 30, 2022)
• Filename: TweetIDs_May_2022.txt (No. of Tweet IDs: 3120, Date Range of the associated Tweet IDs: May 1, 2022 to May 31, 2022)
• Filename: TweetIDs_June_2022.txt (No. of Tweet IDs: 2361, Date Range of the associated Tweet IDs: June 1, 2022 to June 30, 2022)
• Filename: TweetIDs_July_2022.txt (No. of Tweet IDs: 1057, Date Range of the associated Tweet IDs: July 1, 2022 to July 13, 2022)

The dataset contains only Tweet IDs in compliance with the terms and conditions mentioned in the privacy policy, developer agreement, and guidelines for content redistribution of Twitter. The Tweet IDs need to be hydrated to be used. For hydrating this dataset the Hydrator application (link to download and a step-by-step tutorial on how to use Hydrator) may be used.

Table 1. List of commonly used synonyms, terms, and phrases for online learning and COVID-19 that were used for the dataset development

On March 10, 2023, the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center ceased its collecting and reporting of global COVID-19 data. For updated cases, deaths, and vaccine data please visit: U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)For more information, visit the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center.Trends represent the day-to-day rate of new cases with a focus on the most recent 10 to 14 days. Includes Puerto Rico, Guam, Northern Marianas, and U.S. Virgin Islands. Daily new case counts are volatile for many reasons and sometimes the trends reflect that volatility. Thus, we decided to include longer-term summaries here. County Trends as of 9 Mar 20230 (-0) in Emergent1135 (+51) in Spreading1664 (-63) in Epidemic230 (+10) in Controlled110 (+2) in End StageNotes: Many states now only report once per week, and FL only once every two weeks. On 3/7/2022 we adjusted the formula for active cases to reflect the Omicron Variant which is documented to cause lower rates of serious and severe illness. To produce these trends we analyze daily updates from the Johns Hopkins University Coronavirus COVID-19 Global Cases Dashboard, though we expect to be one day behind the dashboard’s live feeds to allow for quality assurance of the data.For more information about COVID-19 trends, see our country level trends story map and the full methodology.Data Source: Johns Hopkins University CSSE US Cases by County dashboard and USAFacts for Utah County level Data.Feature layer generated from running the Join Features solution that is the basis for daily updates for the U.S. County COVID-19 Tends Story Map.

The Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is not just a health crisis but also a social crisis. Confronted with the resurgence of variants with massive infections, the triggered activities from personal needs may promote the spread, which should be considered in risk management. Meanwhile, it is important to ensure that the policy responses on citizen life to a lower level. In the face of Omicron mutations, we need to sum up the control experience accumulated, adapting strategies in the dynamic coevolution process while balancing life resumption and pandemic control, to meet challenges of future crises. We collected 46 cases occurring between 2021 and 2022, mainly from China, but also including five relevant cases from other countries around the world. Based on case studies, we combine micro-view individual needs/behaviors with macro-view management measures linking Maslow’s hierarchy of needs with the transmission chain of Omicron clusters. The proposed loophole chain could help identify both individual and management loopholes in the spread of the virus. The systematic actions that were taken have effectively combated these ubiquitous vulnerabilities at lower costs and lesser time. In the dynamic coevolution process, the Chinese government has made effective and more socially acceptable prevention policies while meeting the divergent needs of the entire society at the minimum costs. Systematic actions do help maintain the balance between individuals’ satisfaction and pandemic containment. This implies that risk management policies should reasonably consider individual needs and improve the cooperation of various stakeholders with targeted flexible measures, securing both public health and life resumption.

As of July 2023, the Omicron variant was the most prevalent among selected countries in Latin America. The share of COVID-19 cases corresponding to the Omicron variant amounted to 100 percent of the analyzed sequences of SARS-CoV-2 in Colombia. The variant Omicron (XBB.1.5) accounted for nearly 81 percent of the sequenced cases in the country, while Omicron (XBB.1.9) added up to 14 percent. Similarly, Peru reported over 90 percent of its reviewed sequences corresponding to the variant Omicron (XBB.1.5), while Omicron (XBB) accounted for around 2.4 percent of cases studied. A regional overview The Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 - the virus causing COVID-19 - was designated as a variant of concern by the World Health Organization in November 2021. Since then, it has been rapidly spreading, causing an unprecedented increase in the number of cases reported worldwide. In Latin America, Brazil had been the most affected country by the disease already before the emergence of the Omicron variant, with nearly 37.4 million cases and around 701,494 confirmed deaths as of May 2, 2023. However, it is Peru that has the largest mortality rate per 100,000 inhabitants due to the SARS-Cov-2 in the region, with roughly 672 deaths per 100,000 people. Vaccination campaigns in Latin America As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to cause social and economic harm worldwide, most Latin American and Caribbean countries advance their immunization programs. As of August 14, 2023, Brazil had administered the largest number of vaccines in the region, with over 486.4 million doses. Mexico and Argentina followed, with about 223.1 million and 116 million COVID-19 doses administered, respectively. However, Cuba had the highest vaccination rate not only in the region, but also the world, with around 391 vaccines given per 100 people.Find the most up-to-date information about the coronavirus pandemic in the world under Statista’s COVID-19 facts and figures site.

Content

The WHO coronavirus (COVID-19) dashboard presents official daily counts of COVID-19 cases, deaths and vaccine utilization reported by countries, territories and areas. Through this dashboard, we aim to provide a frequently updated data visualization, data dissemination and data exploration resource, while linking users to other useful and informative resources.

Caution must be taken when interpreting all data presented, and differences between information products published by WHO, national public health authorities, and other sources using different inclusion criteria and different data cut-off times are to be expected. While steps are taken to ensure accuracy and reliability, all data are subject to continuous verification and change. All counts are subject to variations in case detection, definitions, laboratory testing, vaccination strategy, and reporting strategies.

Acknowledgements

© World Health Organization 2020, All rights reserved.

WHO supports open access to the published output of its activities as a fundamental part of its mission and a public benefit to be encouraged wherever possible. Permission from WHO is not required for the use of the WHO coronavirus disease (COVID-19) dashboard material or data available for download. It is important to note that:

WHO publications cannot be used to promote or endorse products, services or any specific organization.

WHO logo cannot be used without written authorization from WHO.

WHO provides no warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. In no event shall WHO be liable for damages arising from the use of WHO publications.

For further information, please visit WHO Copyright, Licencing and Permissions.

Citation: WHO COVID-19 Dashboard. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2020. Available online: https://covid19.who.int/

Inspiration

Daily cases start increasing suddenly just before the new year and there's a fear for the upcoming wave. Everybody starts to predict the peak cases in the 3rd wave and the date the peak will be reached. Assume you are in the 1st week of January 2022 and there's panic in the country, for the Omicron variant is said to be highly transmittable. Using your machine learning and deep learning skills, you have to create a model that predicts accurately the peak for the 3rd wave.

The first case of COVID-19 in Mexico was detected on March 1, 2020. By the end of the year, the total number of confirmed infections had surpassed 1.4 million. Meanwhile, the number of deaths related to the disease was nearing 148,000. On May 11, 2025, the number of cases recorded had reached 7.6 million, while the number of deaths amounted to around 335,000. The relevance of the Omicron variant Omicron, a highly contagious COVID-19 variant, was declared of concern by the World Health Organization (WHO) at the end of November 2021. As the pandemic unfolded, it became the variant with the highest share of COVID-19 cases in the world. In Latin America, countries such as Colombia, Argentina, Brazil, and Mexico were strongly affected. In fact, by 2023 nearly all analyzed sequences within these countries corresponded to an Omicron subvariant. Beyond a health crisis As the COVID-19 pandemic progressed worldwide, the respiratory disease caused by the virus SARS-CoV-2 virus first detected in Wuhan brought considerable economic consequences for countries and households. While Mexico’s gross domestic product (GDP) in current prices declined in 2020 compared to the previous year, a survey conducted among adults during the first months of 2021 showed COVID-19 impacted families mainly through finances and employment, with around one third of households in Mexico reporting an income reduction and the same proportion having at least one household member suffering from the disease.Find the most up-to-date information about the coronavirus pandemic in the world under Statista’s COVID-19 facts and figures site.

In late-November 2021, the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 (the virus which causes COVID-19) was designated as a variant of concern by the World Health Organization due to fears about a higher transmissibility from the variant and a possible decrease in the effectiveness of vaccines against it. The Omicron variant has been detected in multiple countries since the discovery, and as of April 1, 2022, almost 965 thousand cases have been sequenced in the United Kingdom.

BackgroundMandatory COVID-19 certification, showing proof of vaccination, negative test, or recent infection to access to public venues, was introduced at different times in the four countries of the UK. We aim to study its effects on the incidence of cases and hospital admissions.MethodsWe performed Negative binomial segmented regression and ARIMA analyses for four countries (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales), and fitted Difference-in-Differences models to compare the latter three to England, as a negative control group, since it was the last country where COVID-19 certification was introduced. The main outcome was the weekly averaged incidence of COVID-19 cases and hospital admissions.ResultsCOVID-19 certification led to a decrease in the incidence of cases and hospital admissions in Northern Ireland, as well as in Wales during the second half of November. The same was seen for hospital admissions in Wales and Scotland during October. In Wales the incidence rate of cases in October already had a decreasing tendency, as well as in England, hence a particular impact of COVID-19 certification was less obvious. Method assumptions for the Difference-in-Differences analysis did not hold for Scotland. Additional NBSR and ARIMA models suggest similar results, while also accounting for correlation in the latter. The assessment of the effect in England itself leads one to believe that this intervention might not be strong enough for the Omicron variant, which was prevalent at the time of introduction of COVID-19 certification in the country.ConclusionsMandatory COVID-19 certification reduced COVID-19 transmission and hospitalizations when Delta predominated in the UK, but lost efficacy when Omicron became the most common variant.

BackgroundThe Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 is more highly infectious and transmissible than prior variants of concern. It was unclear which factors might have contributed to the alteration of COVID-19 cases and deaths during the Delta and Omicron variant periods. This study aimed to compare the COVID-19 average weekly infection fatality rate (AWIFR), investigate factors associated with COVID-19 AWIFR, and explore the factors linked to the increase in COVID-19 AWIFR between two periods of Delta and Omicron variants.Materials and methodsAn ecological study has been conducted among 110 countries over the first 12 weeks during two periods of Delta and Omicron variant dominance using open publicly available datasets. Our analysis included 102 countries in the Delta period and 107 countries in the Omicron period. Linear mixed-effects models and linear regression models were used to explore factors associated with the variation of AWIFR over Delta and Omicron periods.FindingsDuring the Delta period, the lower AWIFR was witnessed in countries with better government effectiveness index [β = −0.762, 95% CI (−1.238)–(−0.287)] and higher proportion of the people fully vaccinated [β = −0.385, 95% CI (−0.629)–(−0.141)]. In contrast, a higher burden of cardiovascular diseases was positively associated with AWIFR (β = 0.517, 95% CI 0.102–0.932). Over the Omicron period, while years lived with disability (YLD) caused by metabolism disorders (β = 0.843, 95% CI 0.486–1.2), the proportion of the population aged older than 65 years (β = 0.737, 95% CI 0.237–1.238) was positively associated with poorer AWIFR, and the high proportion of the population vaccinated with a booster dose [β = −0.321, 95% CI (−0.624)–(−0.018)] was linked with the better outcome. Over two periods of Delta and Omicron, the increase in government effectiveness index was associated with a decrease in AWIFR [β = −0.438, 95% CI (−0.750)–(−0.126)]; whereas, higher death rates caused by diabetes and kidney (β = 0.472, 95% CI 0.089–0.855) and percentage of population aged older than 65 years (β = 0.407, 95% CI 0.013–0.802) were associated with a significant increase in AWIFR.ConclusionThe COVID-19 infection fatality rates were strongly linked with the coverage of vaccination rate, effectiveness of government, and health burden related to chronic diseases. Therefore, proper policies for the improvement of vaccination coverage and support of vulnerable groups could substantially mitigate the burden of COVID-19.

COVID-19 rate of death, or the known deaths divided by confirmed cases, was over ten percent in Yemen, the only country that has 1,000 or more cases. This according to a calculation that combines coronavirus stats on both deaths and registered cases for 221 different countries. Note that death rates are not the same as the chance of dying from an infection or the number of deaths based on an at-risk population. By April 26, 2022, the virus had infected over 510.2 million people worldwide, and led to a loss of 6.2 million. The source seemingly does not differentiate between "the Wuhan strain" (2019-nCOV) of COVID-19, "the Kent mutation" (B.1.1.7) that appeared in the UK in late 2020, the 2021 Delta variant (B.1.617.2) from India or the Omicron variant (B.1.1.529) from South Africa.

Where are these numbers coming from?

The numbers shown here were collected by Johns Hopkins University, a source that manually checks the data with domestic health authorities. For the majority of countries, this is from national authorities. In some cases, like China, the United States, Canada or Australia, city reports or other various state authorities were consulted. In this statistic, these separately reported numbers were put together. Note that Statista aims to also provide domestic source material for a more complete picture, and not to just look at one particular source. Examples are these statistics on the confirmed coronavirus cases in Russia or the COVID-19 cases in Italy, both of which are from domestic sources. For more information or other freely accessible content, please visit our dedicated Facts and Figures page.

A word on the flaws of numbers like this

People are right to ask whether these numbers are at all representative or not for several reasons. First, countries worldwide decide differently on who gets tested for the virus, meaning that comparing case numbers or death rates could to some extent be misleading. Germany, for example, started testing relatively early once the country’s first case was confirmed in Bavaria in January 2020, whereas Italy tests for the coronavirus postmortem. Second, not all people go to see (or can see, due to testing capacity) a doctor when they have mild symptoms. Countries like Norway and the Netherlands, for example, recommend people with non-severe symptoms to just stay at home. This means not all cases are known all the time, which could significantly alter the death rate as it is presented here. Third and finally, numbers like this change very frequently depending on how the pandemic spreads or the national healthcare capacity. It is therefore recommended to look at other (freely accessible) content that dives more into specifics, such as the coronavirus testing capacity in India or the number of hospital beds in the UK. Only with additional pieces of information can you get the full picture, something that this statistic in its current state simply cannot provide.

Characteristics of T/C recipients who were infected prior to receiving T/C (pre-T/C) are compared with characteristics of T/C recipients who were diagnosed with COVID after having received any dose of T/C (post-T/C).

As of August 28, 2023, South Korea has confirmed a total of 34,436,586 positive cases of coronavirus (COVID-19), including 35,812 deaths. The first case coronavirus in South Korea was discovered in January 2020. Currently, 25.57 cases per 100,000 people are being confirmed, down from 35.74 cases last month.

Case development trend

In the middle of February 2020, novel coronavirus (COVID-19) began to increase exponentially from patient 31, who was known as a super propagator. With a quick response by the government, the daily new cases once dropped to a single-digit. In May 2020, around three hundreds of new infections were related to cluster infections that occurred in some clubs at Itaewon, an entertainment district in Seoul. Seoul and the metropolitan areas were hit hard by this Itaewon infection. Following the second wave of infections in August, the government announced it was facing the third wave in November with 200 to 300 confirmed cases every day. A fourth wave started in July 2021 from the spread of the delta variant and low vaccination rates. While vaccination rates have risen significantly since then, the highly infectious omicron variant led to a record-breaking rise in cases. This began easing up in March of 2022, though numbers began to rise again around August of 2022. As of October 2022, case numbers are decreasing again.

Economic impact on Korean economy

The Korean economy is interdependent on many countries over the world, so the impact of coronavirus on Korean economy is significant. According to recent OECD forecasts, South Korea's GDP is projected to show positive growth in 2022 and 2023. The first sector the coronavirus impacted was tourism, caused by decreasing numbers of inbound tourists and domestic sales. In the first quarter of 2020, tourism revenue was expected to decrease by 2.9 trillion won. In addition, Korean companies predicted that the damage caused by the losses in sales and exports would be significant. In particular, the South Korean automotive industry was considered to be the most affected industry, as automobile production and parts supply stopped at factories in China.For further information about the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, please visit our dedicated Facts and Figures page.

Trends from around the world suggest that the omicron BA.2 subvariant is increasing in proportion to the original BA.1 subvariant. Here we report two cases of co-infection with omicron BA.1 and omicron BA.2 in co-exposed individuals. In both individuals, genome sequencing and/or S-gene specific PCR identified omicron BA.1 at early time-points, which was replaced by omicron BA.2 at later time-points of the infection. The timeline of our data supports the proposition that BA.2 outcompetes BA.1 in a real-life scenario, and in time becomes the dominant variant in the upper respiratory tract of the host.

As of January 2022, the share of COVID-19 cases corresponding to the Omicron variant in Mexico amounted to over 90 percent of the country's analyzed sequences of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. A month earlier, this figure amounted to 60 percent of cases studied in the country. The Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 - the virus causing COVID-19 - was designated as a variant of concern by the World Health Organization in November 2021 based on its trasmisibility level.

An increasing amount of cases

In Mexico, the spread of the Omicron variant led the Latin American country to reach over 5.6 million confirmed cases of COVID-19 by March 2022, with the surge of close to two million cases in a matter of four months. Never before since the start of the pandemic had there been so many cases recorded in such a short period of time in the country. During those months, approximately 30 thousand people died due to complications stemming from the disease, reaching 320 thousand deaths by March 2022.

A relatively low testing rate

Within the Latin American region, Mexico was the fourth country with the largest number of people infected, following Brazil, Argentina, and Colombia. However, the country is considered to have had a relatively low testing rate. According to recent estimates, around 117 thousand tests per million people were reported in Mexico as of March 2022, one of the lowest COVID-19 testing rates among the countries most affected by the pandemic. In contrast, Peru reached over 836 million tests per million population.

Find the most up-to-date information about the coronavirus pandemic in the world under Statista’s COVID-19 facts and figures site.

As of July 18, 2022, Omicron was the most prevalent variant of COVID-19 sequenced in Brazil. By that time, the share of COVID-19 cases corresponding to the Omicron BA.5 variant amounted to around 73.74 percent of the country's analyzed sequences of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. A month earlier this figure was equal to about 33 percent of the cases studied in Brazil. The Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 - the virus causing COVID-19 - was designated as a variant of concern by the World Health Organization in November 2021. Since then, it has been rapidly spreading, causing an unprecedented increase in the amount of cases reported worldwide. Find the most up-to-date information about the coronavirus pandemic in the world under Statista’s COVID-19 facts and figures site.

As of April 7, 2022, the total number of COVID-19 cases in Singapore amounted to around 1.1 million. There has been a decrease in daily cases in Singapore this week, though the number is still expected to rise largely due to the highly-contagious Omicron variant.

Overcoming the COVID-19 pandemic Singapore was one of the few countries worldwide that had managed to successfully control the spread of COVID-19. This was done through imposing a strict lockdown period during the beginning of the pandemic in 2020, introducing and enforcing hygiene and social-distancing rules, and effective contact tracing, among others. The measures in place had the intended impact, as the number of daily recorded cases have decreased to manageable levels. Furthermore, community transmission has been reduced to just several cases a week; the majority of the daily new cases of COVID-19 recorded were from overseas arrivals.

Recovering from the economic impact of COVID-19 The closure of businesses, compounded by the global restrictions on movement, had had an adverse effect on its economy. Singapore went through its worse recession on record, while the resident unemployment rate increased. However, with restrictions in the country easing, economists have raised their forecasts for economic growth in Singapore for 2021.

Singapore is currently one out of more than 200 countries and territories battling the novel coronavirus. For further information about the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, please visit our dedicated Facts and Figures page.

The coronavirus COVID-19, which originated in Wuhan, China, has spread worldwide. Across the different regions in the world, the number of cases is continuously increasing. As of May 3, 2023, Quezon City reported over 277 thousand cases of COVID-19 – the highest among other cities and provinces in the Philippines.

Lesser restrictions in major cities Despite having the highest number of COVID-19 cases among cities and provinces nationwide, Quezon City was placed under Alert Level 1 for the month of June 2022 – the lowest alert level status for the pandemic. This meant freer movements across populations and full capacity of most establishments. The alert level status will be updated depending on the possible rise of new cases. The lowering down of restriction level was implemented after the vaccination target of 71 million was met. As of July 2022, over 71 million people have already been fully vaccinated from COVID, with over 15 million having received a booster dose.

Unmasking
The possibility of lifting the mandatory wearing of face masks in the country towards the end of 2022 was raised if the government successfully vaccinates 90 million of its 110 million population. In addition, the Philippine government will also start encouraging its population to take the booster shot, in efforts to control the spread of the Omicron subvariant. As of July 2022, the National Capital Region accounted for the highest share of the population with booster shots.